Stop Ragging On Bush.

[Amaroth]

Personally, I think he is a great leader, before I tell you why, I wanna know why so many people hate him.

[thrdflrmshr]

http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=89074#post89074

[Amaroth]

Okay, this is the most RETARDED point that EVERYONE makes. The war. The friggen war. They all think he is a horrible leader just because he went to war. Yeah we all know that some of it was for his dad, but the majority was because he wanted to find the chemical warfare. Now everyone is saying there kids died over nothing because there were no weapons of mass destruction, but did he know that? No. Did we know that? No. That's the thing, we didn't know, so the only way to find out was to look. Sure he didn't find anything, but we had to try, and because he did try, people hate him. Say he didn't even bother, there was no war, and there really was chemical weapons, then they bombed New York with them, people would have hated him for not sending over troops. So he was kind of stuck, he made a good decision I believe. I want an assurance that I'm not going to wake up in a cloud of mustard gas, and he gave me that assurance.

Also people are saying he went to far. You got all of these hippies saying he stayed there too long. Well the hippies are going against what they are arguing for, they want peace? He is trying to restore peace to the country. For a long time it's been absolute chaos, now with no government it's absolute chaos. And you want peace yet you're telling him to just leave the country in this state of emergency? Kinda hipocritical if you ask me. He's trying to restore order, that's why we're still there. So if you can argue that then go for it.

[loveisred]

well said amaroth. I dislike democrats and the left, I also believe that bush is doing a good job in most aspects. I wish he spent less money and had stricter immigration policies though. Giving illegal immigrants amnesty does nothing.

[uknowwho42]

I dislike many of Bush's policies, but I'm not a hippie who just calls him stupid and doesn't back it up. First, I don't believe that general tax cuts help the economy. My family donated our tax break in full to charity, simply because we didn't need it. I would donate it back to the government but I don't feel secure that they would spend it to my liking. The people that need the breaks aren't getting enough, and those that have enough (like our family) are getting way too much.

Even if you support a near trillion dollar tax cut, Bush implemented this simultaneously with a multi-billion dollar war. There has to be a line of priorities for spending, rather than just buying first and asking questions later. This holds true regardless of your views on welfare, tax cuts, the war, or other policies.

Also, as a prospective environmental studies major, there is no way I can vote for Bush considering his environmental policy. He advocates, quite plainly, the worst possible policy for this time period when the environment is so crucial to the well-being of the planet. He lacks a fundamental understanding of what needs to happen in this area.

I wasn't opposed to the war, I'm against affirmative action, and I support some of his other policies...but there are too many that I object to for me to support him as a president.

[thrdflrmshr]

The war is a big one, yes, and I feel that even that is enough to make me think that he is not capabale of running this nation. However, I happen to think that his domestic policy sucks almost as much as his foreign policy.

Read uknowwho42's post. The President's budget is way out of line, and his spending is astronomical. He pretends to put emphasis on things like education (No Child Left Behind is a glaring example,) I hate the Patriot Act, The Department of Homeland Security was created in the midst of chaotic times, and is totally pointless, especially when our current intelligence agencies leave a lot to be desired (it didn't replace them, it was meant to "supplement" them...) I just don't think he's running the country as a whole very well. Who knows if Gore would have done a better job? I want to give Kerry a chance.

[BlackSyphon]

I dislike Bush because...
-He only went to war so we could be friends with Kuwait
-Why? Kuwait would give us oil at lower prices
-He went to WAR, not just look at Iraq for chemical warfare
-They never found any evidence even after the war ended
-Saddam even denied he had the weapons, lie detector anyone?
-Which costs more, a lie detector or a war
-He drained americans through taxes vigorously
-He let his emotions get in the way of judgement
-He waged the war partly becaus his father was nearly assassinated by Saddam
-He killed innocent people and not just bad ones
-He thought the cheaper oil would benefit our economy
-Wrong? Yes. The war costed more than the saved oil
-If he cared so much about oil why did he burn over 100 gallons of it.

I have many reason Amaroth, he lost my respect after his actions, sure, my 12 year old opinion doesn't matter... But he gained just one more enemy...
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

du

[ArcPaladinZero]

Well it's going to be either Kerry or Bush. The Texan or the walking Viagra ad. I've looked at a few different matters and how each sides different ways. So far Kerry is getting my vote.

[ck1]

If I could vote, i would definately vote for Bush. he has led our country through the bombings of 9/11 and used it to draw our country nearer, rather than make us spread apart.

[xyxaxyz2]

and used it to draw our country nearer, rather than make us spread apart.

That explains this thread.

[ArcPaladinZero]

Us Americans are brought together by chaos. That's really sad isn't it? We have to have people die just to start caring. That lasts maybe a year... tops. Oh well, when's the next horrible "accident" or "terrorist attack"?

[thrdflrmshr]

If we had to lose thousands of people to "come together" and you call this "living in harmony" now, then I'd rather have it the way it was.

[uknowwho42]

The only way we got "closer" was more people had similar-looking bumper stickers (US flags)...and even that didn't last too long. In every other regard, the issues resulting from the attacks have polarly divided the country. We were all united for a brief period of time (that of mourning the dead)...once reality and aftermath struck, that unity was gone. If a terrorist attack made our country spread apart, we'd have a much bigger problem than a bad leader to worry about. Any half-decent president could have "unified" us during that time, Bush didn't do a great job, he just didn't screw it up horribly.

[Snarr]

Here is my opinon on the war, it's pasted from the glorious argument thread:

Originally posted by thrdflrmshr
Who is to say that America should go barging in to other country's affairs?


You know if America didn't do that we would all be speaking German right now. And if France didn't do that you would all be saying elevator instead of lift, have the queen on your currency and be sexually repressed.

Sometimes intervention is needed. I'm ashamed of menking that no one intervened in Rwanda to stop the masacres. I'm ashamed of the world that no one intervened in Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge who killed of the population. I'm proud of the world for its internvention in Serbia when it was needed. If nothing else this was a humanetarian act. How is the masacres in Iraq any different to other massacres which called for an intervention?

I don't know if you realise this but the civilian life lost due to the war is by no means any reason to not go to war because the life lost outside the war years by far exceeds the war casualities.

I am only the greatest suppurter of the ideas behind the UN, but I was really dissapointed that the UN had not called an action sooner in Iraq, especially since Hussain has been really mocking the UN with regards to weapon inspections.

[uknowwho42]

Add the Holocaust to your examples Snarr, it is perhaps the worst of them. The thing is, Kerry supported the war too. But it seems that Bush really has no idea what is going on there now, or what he wants to be going on. The goals he is working to are unknown, unclear, and/or obscure, and his press conference last tuesday was FAR from convincing me otherwise....don't even get me started on that appearance. My point is that supporting the war is completely different from supporting Bush - foreign policy (which has been redefined to mean Iraq policy) should not be the only defining point in this election. No matter what happens thousands of miles away, it will not come close to affecting the "average American" (though I hate that term) as much as positions on domestic policy.

[insignifiGant]

I say he is a terrible president because he is from Texas.

Done... next topic?

[Snarr]

The Holocaust is kind of covered by the all speaking German thing. I don't like speaking about it though, makes me sad inside. Anyway American internal policy is really of no interest to me and it would be stupid of me Judging him by that. All I can do is pass judgment on the foreign policy of which I approve.

Originally posted by Amaroth
Now everyone is saying there kids died over nothing because there were no weapons of mass destruction, but did he know that? No. Did we know that? No. That's the thing, we didn't know, so the only way to find out was to look. Sure he didn't find anything, but we had to try, and because he did try, people hate him.

Tiny dude I got some bad news to break to you, he lnew very well he wasn't going to find anything there. Do you think George Bush would have attacked having known that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction? Do you know the power of a nuclear bomb Akujaroth? The atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima is 1000 times weaker then a nuclear bomb – 1000 times! Would he have went in knowing he had biological weapons? Look at the SARS, with about 700 dead it managed to almost cripple the Hong Kong economy and MAJOURLY slowed down international travel. Can you imagine what an anthrax outbreak would cause then? Would he go in knowing Saddam has chemical weapons? No he wouldn't have cause that would have mean the sure demise of the American forces.

No country with nuclear capabilities has been invaded in history, do you know why the USSR hasn’t been invaded? Can you guess why no one attacked China ever since it’s nuclear capability? Why does France feel so safe? Why hasn’t there been wars between India and Pakistan since 1969 even though the HATE each other? Why hasn’t Israel been invaded since they build the nuclear reactor?

The closest that anyone ever went with upsetting a nuclear power is Scud attacks on Israel in 1991 which didn’t even cause 1 casualty. There is NO WAY Bush would have attacked knowing that Saddam had WMD.

On top of all Israeli intelligence had found no evidence at all the Iraq had them at the time, probably the most reliable source on the issue.

[BoBo The Fool]

Originally posted by ck1
If I could vote, i would definately vote for Bush. he has led our country through the bombings of 9/11 and used it to draw our country nearer, rather than make us spread apart.

Do you think Gore would have divided the nation or soemthing? When a country gets attacked, it binds together. When anything gets attacked it binds together, even your little group of friends. I see no reason why this makes Bush a good leader. In fact, according to Orwell, it would be wise of a leader to create an enemy for his country so that the citizens will come together to fight agaisnt the enemy.


Originally posted by Amaroth
the majority was because he wanted to find the chemical warfare. Now everyone is saying there kids died over nothing because there were no weapons of mass destruction, but did he know that? No. Did we know that? No. That's the thing, we didn't know, so the only way to find out was to look. Sure he didn't find anything, but we had to try, and because he did try, people hate him. Say he didn't even bother, there was no war, and there really was chemical weapons, then they bombed New York with them, people would have hated him for not sending over troops. So he was kind of stuck, he made a good decision I believe. I want an assurance that I'm not going to wake up in a cloud of mustard gas, and he gave me that assurance.


Do you have chemical weapons in your house? No? Do we know that? No. I guess the only way to find out is to look. I suggest you build yourself a bomb shelter, because we're not going to take your word for it. And oh well, if we dont find anythign after we destroy your house, then i'm still happy because now i'm sure. After all, if you came and bombed my house when i didn't check yours, i would have been kicking myself for not bombing every other house inthe world just to make sure.

No wait... no i wouldn't. That's just stupid.

[Snarr]

Originally posted by BoBo The Fool
Do you have chemical weapons in your house? No? Do we know that? No. I guess the only way to find out is to look. I suggest you build yourself a bomb shelter, because we're not going to take your word for it. And oh well, if we dont find anythign after we destroy your house, then i'm still happy because now i'm sure. After all, if you came and bombed my house when i didn't check yours, i would have been kicking myself for not bombing every other house inthe world just to make sure.

No wait... no i wouldn't. That's just stupid.

I'm sorry would you take Saddam's word for anything? No. Did Amaroth use WMD in the past no, but Saddam has so we have a good ground to suspect he has them. Did he allow weapons inspectors in the country to look? No.

So we got a good reason to suspect he has WMD and he won't let weapons inspectors in but yet is saying he has none... Anyway if he did have WMD that’s more of a reason NOT to go in rather then go in, see post above for explanation.

[Jeffery]

I hate Dubya because he is a rich poppa's boy who spends hundreds of millions of dollars getting elected to a job that pays hundreds of thousands of dollars.
He is more concerned with shoring up the rich than in creating jobs for the poor.
He is more interested in making it seem like he is doing good things, than in doing something just because it is the right thing.

But this is not something I hate about just him. Kerry is no different. If you ask me all politicians need to stop worrying what the big companies want done, and worry more how to help out those who elected them.

[BoBo The Fool]

Bush is an idiot. He's got worse grades in school than i'm getting (and believe me, i'm not doing well!), and the only reason he got accepted into any good schools was because of his dad. The vote was a perfect display of why democracy is just ridiculous. Do you know how many free votes Bush got because he was a 'Good Christian'.... and they say the US is not a religious state.

I dont understand the right.

[thrdflrmshr]

Ahem... Who gave him the materials to make those weapons? Yeah...

Snarr, you somewhat misunderstood me. I am not saying Hussein should be in power and allowed to do what he wants. I am just saying that George W. Bush fought this war for the wrongs reasons and went about it in the wrong way.

Isolationism was very strong in this country up until World War II. What was the last war that the US was in besides that one? Was the world doing OK?

You also speak of massacres in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia. What do you think the American Revolutionary War was? The American Civil War? Group A killing Group B because Group A thought Group B was wrong. America (and France, althought I was hesitant to bring this up because they seriously effed things over) got involved in Vietnam, and that got us nowhere. Korea was before that. Somalia in 1993. Rwanda. Kosovo. People are going to die because of their ideals; who are we to decide who can and cannot intervene, and which side is right.

I digressed up there, but you made a point about getting involved. If you see a kid beating the shit out of some other kid, would you try and stop him if you were bigger and older? The answer would instinctively be yes, but how do you know that the kid who was getting his ass handed to him hadn't just told the other kid that his religion was wrong and he deserved to be nasally raped for wearing a Star of David?

My point? Bush did the wrong things for the wrong reasons. There are better people to run this country.

[Omega_Paladin]

The ignorance displayed here knows no bounds. Frankly I'm glad most of you are a bunch of twelve year olds, or 14 or what have you because if you had the right to vote it would cause such a spinning in so many graves that the high pitched whirring noise would keep me up all night.


If you are looking for evidence of chemical weapons well hell why don't you ask the four thousand some Kurds Saddam had gassed to death during his "send the children to clear the mindfields" war with Iran, another bastion of reasoning and human rights in the area (this is sarcasm for you twelve year olds out there).

Any action whatsoever no matter what it is will cause problems, this is a basic law of human nature and of politics. With such a large action as Iraq, President Bush was sure to gather his critics. But frankly, the standard line of "Where were the WMD? What about Exit Strategy? What about (fill in here with something stupid)?" seems to give little in the way of any kind of action that would have been prefered.

What would you have done in leiu of the US war in Iraq?

I have yet to hear any kind of secondary plan or even something of different method of executing the war from those who so staunchly oppose the President.

Saddam was a threat to everyone everywhere as was and is Islamic terrorist groups. If not the US and President Bush, then who? Is Saudi Arabia going to step up and remove these people from the ranks of the living, for that is truly the only thing that will secure the safety of the world from their actions. Is the UN going to do anything? Track record there is absolutely asstrocious. Right now countries like China and Lybia sit on the HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL of the UN. China on the HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL. Does no one see a problem with that? They treat these third world dictators like the Pope and then no one understands why these piss ant countries think they can do anything?

Branching to the topic of said war, well listen up kiddies because this is something unarguable. We are at war with terror, fighting war means causalties on all sides. You think that we would go into Afghanistan after 9/11 then it would all be fine and great and a wonderful play time where we lick Barney the dinosaurs fucking pussy? This is not something that will end soon, this is not something that will be clean. This is not something that everyone will agree with. But for the love of god is there no better time to have a pissed off drunk Texan in the White House?

[thrdflrmshr]

Originally posted by Omega_Paladin
But for the love of god is there no better time to have a pissed off drunk Texan in the White House?

That statement nullified your post. Next, please.

[BoBo The Fool]

Noam Chomsky is my hero. d/l some of his talks. He'll convert you all.

[Omega_Paladin]

That statement nullified your post. Next, please.


Dang forgot the sarcasm quotations, sorry that went over your head though I must admit that I was aiming quite low.



The primary perception problem most of you seem to have is that right and wrong is relative.

Something things like what day to go to church and what not are relative.

Stoning people, using women and children as shields, medium scale genocide, hiding among civilians with RPGs and bombs, killing people for absolutely no good reason, taking hostages then burning them alive, dragging bodies through the street, using a peaceful religion as a tool for evil and other general mischief as utterly resolutely wrong.


If you are for any of the things mentitioned above then please go out and buy a large pair of hedge clippers to cut off your gentials to ensure your ignorance and stupidity does not carry over to the next generation.

[thrdflrmshr]

O_P You aren't the only one who can be sarcastic. :)

I wasn't flaming, I was just saying that I don't agree with anything you said, except for this last post, with the list of atrocities. Guess what? That's been done before, and it will continue to happen. Saddam isn't the only one to be a cruel leader, you know.

[Omega_Paladin]

And it will continue to happen until someone with some nuts will stand up and say that the world will take no more shit from these terrorists and thankfully Bush is doing that.

[Snarr]

Originally posted by thrdflrmshr
My point? Bush did the wrong things for the wrong reasons. There are better people to run this country.
I think Bush did the right thing for the wrong reasons, I don't doubt he went there for oil and for his personal vendetta and other reasons that fail to justify it but in the end of the day no matter what Bush had in mind when he did he went i, it needed to be done by someone.

OP Bush knew very well there were no MWD in Iraq.

A war against terrorism was needed indeed because it was getting out of hands, but now that the terrorism globally has suffered a terrible blow its time to strike at the root causes of terrorist like lack of education infrastructure and poverty. You cannot win a war against terrorism; look at Ireland, how long has the IRA been fighting? A shit long time, there need to be a blow at the root causes. Look at Israel, a country fighting a war against terrorism for exactly 55 year (in 6 days) the terrorist will never stop because you attack them, on the contrary that only gives them more reason the fight you.

[Omega_Paladin]

Originally posted by Snarr
I think Bush did the right thing for the wrong reasons, I don't doubt he went there for oil and for his personal vendetta and other reasons that fail to justify it but in the end of the day no matter what Bush had in mind when he did he went i, it needed to be done by someone.

OP Bush knew very well there were no MWD in Iraq.

A war against terrorism was needed indeed because it was getting out of hands, but now that the terrorism globally has suffered a terrible blow its time to strike at the root causes of terrorist like lack of education infrastructure and poverty. You cannot win a war against terrorism; look at Ireland, how long has the IRA been fighting? A shit long time, there need to be a blow at the root causes. Look at Israel, a country fighting a war against terrorism for exactly 55 year (in 6 days) the terrorist will never stop because you attack them, on the contrary that only gives them more reason the fight you.


This is why we are rebuilding afghanistan and Iraq. New schools, clean water and all that happy crap.

But addressing these roots of terrorism does not negate the problem of destroying that which already exists and in many cases this must be done before any attention can be paid to said root causes.


As a friend of mine recently returned from Iraq said


"It is very hard to build a school when someone is shooting at you."

[Snarr]

Yep the current network of terrorism has to take a blow before root causes can be addressed, I couldn't agree more. But its very hard to draw the line where enough efforts have been put in opression of terrorists, and I can understand people arguing about it.

Man I sound like some sort of preacher.

[Omega_Paladin]

Man I sound like soe sort of preacher


An Irish preacher you drunk :D



The real bottom line seems to be that said actions were required. Execution: arguable. But then again what isn't.


So, having been throughly beaten to death, lets us drop this thread to the bottom of the message board.





Or not, its all good :)

[BlackSyphon]

Obviously snarr know a lot about this topic, from what he says, :D
OP Bush knew very well there were no MWD in Iraq. ~Snarr
Did he attack for just these reasons, oil and revenge, if he did I am sure there has to be a better leader than him. He let is emtions and somewhat of a greed influence his descisions. Lets put it this way, he isn't the best man for the job.

Okay, new perspective, Bush led us through some difficult times, yes, but did he lead well? That is debatable, was terrorism really getting out of hand, after one attack? Yes, that one attack shook this (USA) mighty nation, panick or react without thinking through fully is not a trait we want in a leader.

In fact, on the news in America, Bush had his highly authorized terrorism expert. On the news the expert clearly says he knew the president could have stopped 9/11. He had figured part of it out. All the cabinet members said his message got through, but did president Bush get the message. Our President said "I had no knowledge of this attack, if I did I would have done anything in my power to prevent it."

Did he use his power for the right thing? Even after 9/11, yes, he had good intentions for for us, I agree, trying to lower the price of oil after our economy had fallen. But as snarr said, he would have been a hero for the wrong reason. If I mis interpretted that tell me.

Intervention is necissary in our current society, I mean, in a while, countries without nuclear power would strive for it, a few years ago Korea tried to establish a plat, however UN official said no, for good reason too. After they made the plant, they had no idea what Korea would do with it.

Over all, Bush did some good and bad things, nevertheless, in most peoples mind, bad actions are more conspicuous than good ones. I am under that impression for the time being.

[Aro23r]

I am here to straighten out the facts. I am not taking sides. I am trying to be objective (as much as I can be, because all humans are biased.) I will use the last post because that one I found has a lot of uninformed information in it.

Did he attack for just these reasons, oil and revenge, if he did I am sure there has to be a better leader than him. He let is emtions and somewhat of a greed influence his descisions.

Name a modern politician (from Andrew Jackson til the present) who did not let his emotions and personal greed influence his decisions. You won't find anyone.

Okay, new perspective, Bush led us through some difficult times, yes, but did he lead well? That is debatable, was terrorism really getting out of hand, after one attack? Yes, that one attack shook this (USA) mighty nation, panick or react without thinking through fully is not a trait we want in a leader.

So you're saying we should have sit back on our asses and be attacked again? You think Spain did the right thing with withdrawing their forces from the Middle East and giving in to the terrorism, that will only show them that terrorism gives them what they want.

In fact, on the news in America, Bush had his highly authorized terrorism expert. On the news the expert clearly says he knew the president could have stopped 9/11. He had figured part of it out. All the cabinet members said his message got through, but did president Bush get the message. Our President said "I had no knowledge of this attack, if I did I would have done anything in my power to prevent it."

Did he use his power for the right thing? Even after 9/11, yes, he had good intentions for for us, I agree, trying to lower the price of oil after our economy had fallen. But as snarr said, he would have been a hero for the wrong reason. If I mis interpretted that tell me.

People blame Bush for not being able to do anything about September 11th, but there was nothing he could do about it. He inherited it from Clinton. (Much like how JFK inheritted the Bay of Pigs from the Eisenhower.) Can a President really doing anything as major as stop a full on assault on the United States between January 20th and September 11th (really should be a week or so earlier to fully crush an attack like this, but I will be lenient)? Also, how can someone really go about stopping a person from doing something like this? It is impossible to spot details as minute as this (boxcutters or whatnot. Much like people think it is possible to stop suicide bombers elsewhere, it just cannot be done.)

Over all, Bush did some good and bad things, nevertheless, in most peoples mind, bad actions are more conspicuous than good ones. I am under that impression for the time being. Words of wisdom for all of you.

Here is a personal comment:
People say Clinton was a bad president because he lied about whether or not a White House intern gave him head one night (day?). How does that affect his ability to run the country? He is a guy, like many of you. Him doing what any man would do is not grounds to rule him a bad president and try to impeach him. Is he a bad person, that is debateable. Is he a bad president, no.

[LondonJack]

Wow religion and politics on the front page at the same time. Everyone is trying really hard to turn these forums into a spring edition of the special olympics, nice work. ;)

[Aro23r]

And it is all thanks to me when I made that "Gay Marriage: For or Against" thread. I don't know whether you want to thank me, or kill me for doing that. =Þ

[Snarr]

BlackSyphon are you sure you are 12?

[jobeani]

Bush shoots first and then asks questions. He may not do things for the right reasons of doing things but he gets things done, in no particular order mind you, but he gets it done. Now the way things should be done is a completely different matter that shouldn't be discussed by myself due to the fact that I am inept in such a conversation of this level therefore I will leave all argumentations to those who have a more complete understanding of the total situation.

[thrdflrmshr]

Originally posted by jobeani
Bush shoots first and then asks questions. He may not do things for the right reasons of doing things but he gets things done, in no particular order mind you, but he gets it done.

What did he get done, Machiavelli?

[Omega_Paladin]

I just want to say that I dont' know what the hell people are complaining about when they say there is nothing revelant or non-half-brained. Religion, politics, origins of the universe...





















oh...

[jobeani]

yea.... I just felt like saying something:p

[thrdflrmshr]

Originally posted by Omega_Paladin
I just want to say that I dont' know what the hell people are complaining about when they say there is nothing revelant or non-half-brained. Religion, politics, origins of the universe...

I don't quite understand what you're talking about. Did you meant relevant? Are you saying that you hate it when people say that there is nothing worth arguing over because it is pointless?

[Northwind]

OK, I have stayed out of this, but can no longer do so.

Just curious, but for those supporting Bush, what area of American life has he not made worse?

Economy - tanking and Bush's only response is to give huge tax cuts to the wealthy.

Envionment - Bush has decimated environmental regulations for the benefit of big business. The rest of us will have to do with being poor and not being able to afford to move to the fewer and fewer non-polluted places. He has opposed fuel efficiency standard and the idea of conservation in general.

Finances - We now have the largest debt in the history of our country. Yes, some of this is due to the war, but Bush's response is to lower taxes. This simply guarantees that our children will have to pay this off down the road. Fiscal conservatism? Hardly.

Civil liberties - Thanks to the "Patriot Act" the government is able to intrude into every area of our lives (as if there is no other way to protect us from terrorism). Also, he contradicted his earlier statements and is now working to ban the idea letting states decide how they want to handle gay marriage.

Standing in the world - Following 9/11, much of the world united with the plight of America. Bush has squandered that good feeling and now people in many countries are feeling more threatened by Bush's administration than they are by terrorists.

War - Not only did Bush lie about the need to go to war (Oh, how I pine for the days when presidents lied about where their dick had been rather than reasons to bring the country to war!), he took a volatile situation and made it worse. "Hey look, if we go to war with Iraq, we can make it a better breeding ground for terrorism than it already is! Cool!"

In every area, he has simply made the situation worse. I would be interested to hear from someone who does not think that this is the case (and why).

[Northwind]

I realize that this is a double post, but thought I would separate this out as it is not mine.
__________________________________________________ _
I recently had an email exchange with a right-winger from my local newspaper, and of course the war with Iraq came up pretty quick. But he said something in defense of George Bush that really surprised me. In defense of the attack on Iraq he said 'between Hussein and Bush, Hussein is the bad guy'.
My first response was ... So your guy is better than a third world dictator, Wow! what an accomplishment! Does he put that on his resume?
And with that in mind, I started wondering ... what would a George W. Bush resume look like exactly?
Listed below is what I came up with,
Best!
Kelley Kramer
-------------
George W. Bush Resume
Past work experience:
· Ran for congress and lost.
· Produced a Hollywood slasher B movie.
· Bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas, company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock.
· Bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using tax-payer money. Biggest move: Traded Sammy Sosa to the Chicago White Sox.
· With fathers help (and his name) was elected Governor of Texas.

Accomplishments: Changed pollution laws for power and oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state in the Union. Replaced Los Angeles with Houston as the most smog ridden city in America. Cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas government to the tune of billions in borrowed money. Set record for most executions by any Governor in American history.
· Became president after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes, with the help of my fathers appointments to the Supreme Court.
Accomplishments as president:
· Attacked and took over two countries.
· Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury.
· Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
· Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
· Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
· First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
· First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
· First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
· After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history.
· Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history.
· In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
· Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history.
· Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period.
· Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
· Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television.
· Signed more laws and executive orders circumventing the Constitution than any president in US history.
· Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
· Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
· Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
· Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. (http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/)
· Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
· My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history.
· Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleezza Rice has an Chevron oil tanker named after her).
· Had more states to simultaneously go bankrupt than any president in the history of the United States.
· Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world.
· Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
· Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history.
· First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission.
· First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board.
· Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
· Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
· Withdrew from the World Court of Law.
· Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
· First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections).
· All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
· My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
· Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
· First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
· First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)
· First US president to establish a secret shadow government.
· Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
· With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years.
· Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
· First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
· Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
· Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
· Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'.
· Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects.
· In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
· Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
· In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war.
· Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.
Records and References:
· At least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available).
· AWOL from National Guard and Deserted the military during a time of war.
· Refuse to take drug test or even answer any questions about drug use.
· All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my fathers library, sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.
· All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.
· All minutes of meetings for any public corporation I served on the board are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view.
· Any records or minutes from meetings I (or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public review.
· For personal references please speak to my daddy or uncle James Baker (They can be reached at their offices of the Carlyle Group for war-profiteering.)
A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY

[Medemia]

Alright, here goes.

Economy: The Clinton Presidency thought they "defeated the economic cycle" which the latest recession proved it did not. The economy always fluxuates from boom to bust. It's just the way the economy works. Saying that, at the end of the 70's, the US was in a bad recession. Reagan came into office and what did he do? He cut taxes. His tax cuts are what made the economy of the 80's and 90's possible. I believe that people can do better things with their money than the govenment can do for them. As for the rich getting all the tax cuts, that's bunk. I made less than $30k last year and I got close to $7k back from my tax refund. From personal experience, that tax cut helped me a ton. And besides, people complain that the rich pay the least taxes. That's bunk too. If someone makes $1,000,000 and pays 1% in taxes after tax breaks, that's still $10,000, which was more than 100 poor people pay in taxes. And the millionaire is putting more money back into the economy by buying, employing others, and investing in the stock market.
Saying that, the tax cuts are good for the economy. They are good for economic growth. And they put more money in my pocket to live.

Environment: What I don't get is the fear of drilling for oil in Alaska. Are people afraid that the oil companies are going to spill oil everywhere, painting the entire state of Alaska black as they sloppily transport the black gold from the drills to their leaky boats, knowing that every drop of oil they spill is money down the drain? If you truely want to help the environment, get rid of your car, your computer, anything electric in your house. Make your own clothes and shoes out of animal hide (which you must farm yourself) or out of plants that you grow yourself. Start conservation yourself. Bush has tried to help us become more self-reliant with oil. Environmentalist are the ones who are holding us up.
On a side note, why is big business the "bad guy"? Does big business do nothing for you? Are we not employed by big business, get our needs supplied by big business, have our desires available by big business? Look at your computer? What name is on it? Likely, it's big business (even inside is Intel or Macintosh... big business). Throw them away if you hate big business.

Finances: War is expensive. But this war is worth it. What the question is, how do we make up the money. You believe that taxes should be raised. I believe that taxes should be lowered, creating more jobs, higher incomes, thus creating more taxes through growth, not pillaging. I don't like what Bush is doing with bigger government, but the war is not to blame. If we are hurting so much economically, why are we starting new social programs to pay for everyone's drugs? It seems we are only hurting economically when it is a Republican interest.

Civil Liberties: I am not a big fan of the Patriot Act. I believe it is a violation of the Constitution and it is one of the true mistakes of the Bush presidency.

Standing in the world: When someone wants protection, who do they turn to? Those mighty warriors of Luxemborg are great world protectors. What this is is why we all boo the Yankees in baseball. We don't like the Yankees because they are the biggest and have the best talent. The world boos the US because we are the biggest and have the biggest wallets. No matter what we do, even if we suddenly became isolationalist again, is going to change that. Its funny though, everyone hates the US until they need help, then they are begging at the UN for American help. And then when they receive the help, they go back to hating the US.

War: The question is, Is the world better off today with Sadaam Hussein out of Iraq than it was when he was there? I guess only you can answer that question. The reason given to go into Iraq was not only to look for WMD, but also Sadaam Hussein's constant disregard to the peace treaty that ended the first Persian Gulf war. When you lose a war, you suffer the consequences of whatever the winner says. When Germany lost WWI, the Treaty of Versailles was made by the victors. If similar action was taken by the world to make sure that Germany was in compliance with the Treaty instead of letting it go wild, World War II may have been adverted. And is this harder than Bush originally said it would be? I remember Bush talking about how this was going to be a long war on Terrorism. That we would lose some of our sons. But the course was true and was right. I believe it still is.

Just random babblings.